Maintenance Planning for Rail Asset Management—Current Practices (2020) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:
Pages 11-22
The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.
From page 11... ...
11 The survey questionnaire was sent to 28 transit agencies, 16 of which replied, as presented in Appendix A The respondents represented a significant portion of U.S.
|
From page 12... ...
12 Maintenance Planning for Rail Asset Management -- Current Practices 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 UT and Supplemental UT Alone Figure 3. Distribution of systems using UT and supplemental NDT (routine)
|
From page 13... ...
Survey Results 13 3.2 Inspection for Rail Defects: Scheduling 3.2.1 Standards and Regulations In part because of the nature of transit operations and the current structure of oversight at the federal, state, and local levels, there is no current industrywide standard or regulation for scheduling inspections. Thus, transit agencies must either determine which external standards they will follow or develop their own internal standards.
|
From page 14... ...
14 Maintenance Planning for Rail Asset Management -- Current Practices reported testing twice per year, one reported testing three times annually, and one reported testing four times annually. Generally, the larger the system, the more frequent its testing regimen (see Figure 6)
|
From page 15... ...
Survey Results 15 Figure 8. Frequency of visual inspection.
|
From page 16... ...
16 Maintenance Planning for Rail Asset Management -- Current Practices Of the systems that reported conducting NDT other than UT or visual inspection, two had regular NDT programs, and both employed video inspection. WMATA has a pilot program whereby track is inspected by video annually.
|
From page 17... ...
Survey Results 17 then decrease continuously with increasing system size until those for the SDMTS, at which point they begin to climb again. The initial decrease followed by an increase may be attributable to the fact that (a)
|
From page 18... ...
18 Maintenance Planning for Rail Asset Management -- Current Practices scheduling. Another agency said that it did not consider risk-based scheduling to be effective given the number of defects the agency found.
|
From page 19... ...
Survey Results 19 it as a defect) ; non-testable rail; and split web defects.
|
From page 20... ...
20 Maintenance Planning for Rail Asset Management -- Current Practices that visual inspectors cannot. This capability suggests that more extensive use of UT might yield a higher proportion of defects found.
|
From page 21... ...
Survey Results 21 Percentage of Defects Found Agency Name/Location Ultrasonic Testing Eddy Current or Other NDT Track Circuits Visual Inspection by Track Inspector Tren Urbano, Puerto Rico 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Metro Transit, Minneapolis, MN 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 Central Puget Sound Regional Transit Authority, Seattle, WA 5.0 0.0 0.0 95.0 Port Authority of Allegheny County, Pittsburgh, PA 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Valley Metro, Phoenix, AZ 5.0 0.0 90.0 5.0 Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority, San Jose, CA 90.0 0.0 0.0 10.0 San Diego Metropolitan Transit System, San Diego, CA 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Regional Transportation District, Denver, CO 96.0 0.0 4.0 0.0 Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority, Los Angeles, CA 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Chicago Transit Authority, Chicago, IL 88.0 0.0 6.3 9.2 Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority, Washington, DC 17.0 0.0 56.0 28.0 Southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation Authority, Philadelphia, PA 92.7 0.0 2.1 5.2 Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority, Boston, MA 96.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 New York City Transit Authority, New York, NY 90.0 0.0 0.0 10.0 Table 3. Distribution of defects found, by method.
|
From page 22... ...
22 Maintenance Planning for Rail Asset Management -- Current Practices 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1880 1900 1920 1940 1960 1980 2000 2020 D ef ec ts P er T ra ck M ile Date of System Opening Figure 21. Defects per track mile as function of system age.
|
Key Terms
This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
More
information on Chapter Skim is available.